TM has been selling this deal like Blair, but without his talent. Unless she is going for a reluctant People’s Vote, she has been very badly advised.
I think she might be going for a reluctant peoples' vote, but even if she is not, how do you think she should have been selling the deal? She certainly lacks the talent that Blair had in selling things, but what could she have done differently to sell it, given her limited talent? Serious question, as she could have approached things differently, but I'm uncertain which would have worked better.
First, she needs to decide who’s votes she is trying to win , Labour votes or Brexit Tories. You cannot win them all. So get off the fence. She should have forced the Tory VONC last week on her terms, win and then essentially ignored the ERG and persuade Labour votes.
My only current explanation for what she doing is that she is trying to win the public’s vote, not her NPs. And is therefore going for a People’s Vote.
She has apparently rejected a "peoples vote" 27 times in her Commons sojourns of the last week.
Dead cert then if 2017 is something to go by.
I don’t think she is that clever, but am prepared to be pleasantly surprised.
Getting 90 or so MPs to change their mind on Europe is .....nah, just forget it. Not going to happen.
May is toast. Before Christmas.
And then what and more important who can replace her and get consensus
Jeremy Corbyn.
He'd get closer to consensus in the Commons at least.
He would have to stand up and make a decision, not play to the gallery.
Indeed it is no means certain he would win a GE
I agree, and yet he'd still be able to get more votes behind an option than any Tory leader - his party are not as divided (even though they are not 100% united) and he would be more flexible (if indeed a renegotiation is even possible) and other parties would be much more likely to be back something of his than the Tories, even if the terms were broadly the same.
Corbyn might as well be given his chance than have the Tories waste months on a new leader contest (if they could unite around a leader and a brexit position they would not have taken this long to challenge May) and then still be very divided at the end of it.
Corbyn would very probably not be up to resolving the current challenges. But at this point he might well do a better job than the Tories.
TM has been selling this deal like Blair, but without his talent. Unless she is going for a reluctant People’s Vote, she has been very badly advised.
I think she might be going for a reluctant peoples' vote, but even if she is not, how do you think she should have been selling the deal? She certainly lacks the talent that Blair had in selling things, but what could she have done differently to sell it, given her limited talent? Serious question, as she could have approached things differently, but I'm uncertain which would have worked better.
Made a decision sooner, started tackling it sooner, setting out her stall sooner. ..
If there was no alternative what took her so long to get there?
Hard to argue with those points. I'd back her now, and the task was very difficult, but she has been the architect of her own misfortunes to a large extent.
Yes. She was hobbled by needlessly adopting the red lines that Nick Timothy drew up for her. There's a good account in Tim Shipman's 'Fall Out'.
The Timothy/Hill era does seem to have been a reversal of the old saying that "advisers advise, ministers decide".
TM has been selling this deal like Blair, but without his talent. Unless she is going for a reluctant People’s Vote, she has been very badly advised.
I think she might be going for a reluctant peoples' vote, but even if she is not, how do you think she should have been selling the deal? She certainly lacks the talent that Blair had in selling things, but what could she have done differently to sell it, given her limited talent? Serious question, as she could have approached things differently, but I'm uncertain which would have worked better.
First, she needs to decide who’s votes she is trying to win , Labour votes or Brexit Tories. You cannot win them all. So get off the fence. She should have forced the Tory VONC last week on her terms, win and then essentially ignored the ERG and persuade Labour votes.
My only current explanation for what she doing is that she is trying to win the public’s vote, not her NPs. And is therefore going for a People’s Vote.
She has apparently rejected a "peoples vote" 27 times in her Commons sojourns of the last week.
When the times change you change with them. If the Commons has rejected her deal something needs to happen instead, and if she is still PM she would have to consider the previously inconsiderable.
TM has been selling this deal like Blair, but without his talent. Unless she is going for a reluctant People’s Vote, she has been very badly advised.
I think she might be going for a reluctant peoples' vote, but even if she is not, how do you think she should have been selling the deal? She certainly lacks the talent that Blair had in selling things, but what could she have done differently to sell it, given her limited talent? Serious question, as she could have approached things differently, but I'm uncertain which would have worked better.
First, she needs to decide who’s votes she is trying to win , Labour votes or Brexit Tories. You cannot win them all. So get off the fence. She should have forced the Tory VONC last week on her terms, win and then essentially ignored the ERG and persuade Labour votes.
It is all so easy when you do not actually have the responsibility
It is nevertheless right that if your closing strategy relies upon support from the opposition, your opening strategy needs to be open to cross-party discussion and a willingness to at least consider taking the opposition viewpoint on board (if they refuse to participate, you still get brownie points for having tried). Yet May, deprived of her majority, rebuffed all those urging her to take on board non-Conservative views and progressed Brexit as a single-party matter throughout (even to the point where she has now alienated her friends in the DUP), with rhetoric aimed at keeping the Brexit hardnuts behind her on board. It is hardly surprising therefore that when she arrives at the end game there is very little appetite on the opposition benches for lending her a hand.
TM has been selling this deal like Blair, but without his talent. Unless she is going for a reluctant People’s Vote, she has been very badly advised.
I think she might be going for a reluctant peoples' vote, but even if she is not, how do you think she should have been selling the deal? She certainly lacks the talent that Blair had in selling things, but what could she have done differently to sell it, given her limited talent? Serious question, as she could have approached things differently, but I'm uncertain which would have worked better.
First, she needs to decide who’s votes she is trying to win , Labour votes or Brexit Tories. You cannot win them all. So get off the fence. She should have forced the Tory VONC last week on her terms, win and then essentially ignored the ERG and persuade Labour votes.
My only current explanation for what she doing is that she is trying to win the public’s vote, not her NPs. And is therefore going for a People’s Vote.
She has apparently rejected a "peoples vote" 27 times in her Commons sojourns of the last week.
Dead cert then if 2017 is something to go by.
I don’t think she is that clever, but am prepared to be pleasantly surprised.
I think she would rather win the MPs vote, but she knows that is not going to happen so has always had one eye on what might come after.
TM has been selling this deal like Blair, but without his talent. Unless she is going for a reluctant People’s Vote, she has been very badly advised.
I think she might be going for a reluctant peoples' vote, but even if she is not, how do you think she should have been selling the deal? She certainly lacks the talent that Blair had in selling things, but what could she have done differently to sell it, given her limited talent? Serious question, as she could have approached things differently, but I'm uncertain which would have worked better.
Made a decision sooner, started tackling it sooner, setting out her stall sooner. The shape of her deal has been clear since Chequers (which makes Raab et al resigning more inexplicable to me) but what has she done to argue her cause between Chequers and last week?
Blair like it or not spent about a year laying the groundwork for the Iraq War, arguing why it would be justified before it happened. May has been reluctant to make a decision then once made acts like there is suddenly no alternative.
If there was no alternative what took her so long to get there?
May has always taken decision with a small coterie of advisers and then sprung them on everybody else when it was too late to change anything.
Yes - which is not the way to bring the party and the nation with you.
TM has been selling this deal like Blair, but without his talent. Unless she is going for a reluctant People’s Vote, she has been very badly advised.
I think she might be going for a reluctant peoples' vote, but even if she is not, how do you think she should have been selling the deal? She certainly lacks the talent that Blair had in selling things, but what could she have done differently to sell it, given her limited talent? Serious question, as she could have approached things differently, but I'm uncertain which would have worked better.
First, she needs to decide who’s votes she is trying to win , Labour votes or Brexit Tories. You cannot win them all. So get off the fence. She should have forced the Tory VONC last week on her terms, win and then essentially ignored the ERG and persuade Labour votes.
My only current explanation for what she doing is that she is trying to win the public’s vote, not her NPs. And is therefore going for a People’s Vote.
She has apparently rejected a "peoples vote" 27 times in her Commons sojourns of the last week.
When the times change you change with them. If the Commons has rejected her deal something needs to happen instead, and if she is still PM she would have to consider the previously inconsiderable.
Indeed so but that might well be Norway plus rather than the remainiacs wet dream option
TM has been selling this deal like Blair, but without his talent. Unless she is going for a reluctant People’s Vote, she has been very badly advised.
I think she might be going for a reluctant peoples' vote, but even if she is not, how do you think she should have been selling the deal? She certainly lacks the talent that Blair had in selling things, but what could she have done differently to sell it, given her limited talent? Serious question, as she could have approached things differently, but I'm uncertain which would have worked better.
First, she needs to decide who’s votes she is trying to win , Labour votes or Brexit Tories. You cannot win them all. So get off the fence. She should have forced the Tory VONC last week on her terms, win and then essentially ignored the ERG and persuade Labour votes.
My only current explanation for what she doing is that she is trying to win the public’s vote, not her NPs. And is therefore going for a People’s Vote.
She has apparently rejected a "peoples vote" 27 times in her Commons sojourns of the last week.
Dead cert then if 2017 is something to go by.
I don’t think she is that clever, but am prepared to be pleasantly surprised.
I think she would rather win the MPs vote, but she knows that is not going to happen so has always had one eye on what might come after.
She has spent her time not talking to MPs. She has been talking to voters as if it were an election campaign. Just saying.
Sky reporting more letters going in so vnoc on the cards. I am content for that to happen now.
It would help to resolve TM position in the party one way or another
What a peculiar time to send in letters.
The only explanation I can think of for why now, and not a week or so ago, or after the deal fails, is that a number of people are desperate to avoid voting on May's deal for some reason, since if she goes there is no point in bringing it to the House.
I don't understand that at all. If the deal is to be rejected for one the EU should be given the courtesy of the sovereign parliament rejecting it, not just the Tory party refusing to let parliament consider it, and for two given how many people are so confident this deal is such a pile of horsecrap, they should all welcome the opportunity to put their names to that belief.
TM has been selling this deal like Blair, but without his talent. Unless she is going for a reluctant People’s Vote, she has been very badly advised.
I think she might be going for a reluctant peoples' vote, but even if she is not, how do you think she should have been selling the deal? She certainly lacks the talent that Blair had in selling things, but what could she have done differently to sell it, given her limited talent? Serious question, as she could have approached things differently, but I'm uncertain which would have worked better.
First, she needs to decide who’s votes she is trying to win , Labour votes or Brexit Tories. You cannot win them all. So get off the fence. She should have forced the Tory VONC last week on her terms, win and then essentially ignored the ERG and persuade Labour votes.
My only current explanation for what she doing is that she is trying to win the public’s vote, not her NPs. And is therefore going for a People’s Vote.
She has apparently rejected a "peoples vote" 27 times in her Commons sojourns of the last week.
Dead cert then if 2017 is something to go by.
I don’t think she is that clever, but am prepared to be pleasantly surprised.
I think she would rather win the MPs vote, but she knows that is not going to happen so has always had one eye on what might come after.
She has spent her time not talking to MPs. She has been talking to voters as if it were an election campaign. Just saying.
What a load of nonsense, EU people do queue jump, perfectly legally, but they do that. Why are we so scared of speaking the truth.
Er. Cos if it is perfectly legal it isn't queue jumping? It is following the lawful process.
So far as I'm aware, queue jumping in normal life isn't illegal either, it just tends to make those being 'jumped', who were part of the queue (if judged in chronological order), annoyed. So legality is surely beside the point.
But there is literally no queue for EU migrants at present.
What rubbish, how can you queue jump when you are following the legal process. They take their rightful place based on the laws implemented by the Tories.
Why does queue jumping have to imply illegality?
Queue jumping is definitely in the "not right" section of the British mind.
I think the PM was right to apologise, and I'll leave this point now in case I turn into the ghost of @Scott_P.
There are plenty of queues in terms of immigration. EU citizens are exempt from all of them. Why should they be?
Er, because the arrangement is reciprocal?
We voted in 2016 to give up our FOM rights. No one in the country expected or expects that FOM would be ended only in one direction.
This is two separate issues. Freedom of Movement has nothing to do with passport control. Freedom of movement is the ability to settle in a country and work and the like. Passport control is about whether there is a requirement to fill in a "entry/exit" card.
If we want, post exit, we can leave the EU/EEA/Switzerland passport co-operation system, where there is a shared database of passport numbers, RFID, and elecrtonic photos. In which case, we'd move to a system like with the rest of the world where we have "entry/exit" cards, and EU/EEA/Switzerland citizens cannot use electronic passport gates. The effect of this would be to slightly reduce the amount of time British people took to get through passport control, and to substantially increase the time it takes EU/EEA/Swiss citizens.
Personally, I think it would be a mistake for us not to have a reciprocal agreement for passport control. It would inconvenience British travellers going abroad, and it would be a small - but meaningful - barrier to the UK remaining the business capital of Europe.
TM has been selling this deal like Blair, but without his talent. Unless she is going for a reluctant People’s Vote, she has been very badly advised.
I think she might be going for a reluctant peoples' vote, but even if she is not, how do you think she should have been selling the deal? She certainly lacks the talent that Blair had in selling things, but what could she have done differently to sell it, given her limited talent? Serious question, as she could have approached things differently, but I'm uncertain which would have worked better.
Made a decision sooner, started tackling it sooner, setting out her stall sooner. ..
If there was no alternative what took her so long to get there?
Hard to argue with those points. I'd back her now, and the task was very difficult, but she has been the architect of her own misfortunes to a large extent.
Yes. She was hobbled by needlessly adopting the red lines that Nick Timothy drew up for her. There's a good account in Tim Shipman's 'Fall Out'.
The Timothy/Hill era does seem to have been a reversal of the old saying that "advisers advise, ministers decide".
TM has been selling this deal like Blair, but without his talent. Unless she is going for a reluctant People’s Vote, she has been very badly advised.
I think she might be going for a reluctant peoples' vote, but even if she is not, how do you think she should have been selling the deal? She certainly lacks the talent that Blair had in selling things, but what could she have done differently to sell it, given her limited talent? Serious question, as she could have approached things differently, but I'm uncertain which would have worked better.
First, she needs to decide who’s votes she is trying to win , Labour votes or Brexit Tories. You cannot win them all. So get off the fence. She should have forced the Tory VONC last week on her terms, win and then essentially ignored the ERG and persuade Labour votes.
My only current explanation for what she doing is that she is trying to win the public’s vote, not her NPs. And is therefore going for a People’s Vote.
She has apparently rejected a "peoples vote" 27 times in her Commons sojourns of the last week.
Dead cert then if 2017 is something to go by.
I don’t think she is that clever, but am prepared to be pleasantly surprised.
I think she would rather win the MPs vote, but she knows that is not going to happen so has always had one eye on what might come after.
She has spent her time not talking to MPs. She has been talking to voters as if it were an election campaign. Just saying.
A snap something is very likely.
That was my point - she could see the second it was announced (and probably afterChequers) that the MPs were not going to back it. I totally believe that she doesn't want a snap referendum or GE - too uncertain, or even more likely to not back her deal - but she has eyes and ears, she knows MPs are not getting no board, she would not be human if she were not planning something on the off chance she is not kicked out soon.
I have not seen the debate but looks like she has said Norway is not recognising the vote.
I think that is unwise as I do believe, as I said this morning, that would pass the HOC and avoid the need for a dreadfully divisive, angry and full of hate referendum. Those wanting one need to be careful for what they wish for. It does not even guarantee a different result
TM has been selling this deal like Blair, but without his talent. Unless she is going for a reluctant People’s Vote, she has been very badly advised.
I think she might be going for a reluctant peoples' vote, but even if she is not, how do you think she should have been selling the deal? She certainly lacks the talent that Blair had in selling things, but what could she have done differently to sell it, given her limited talent? Serious question, as she could have approached things differently, but I'm uncertain which would have worked better.
First, she needs to decide who’s votes she is trying to win , Labour votes or Brexit Tories. You cannot win them all. So get off the fence. She should have forced the Tory VONC last week on her terms, win and then essentially ignored the ERG and persuade Labour votes.
My only current explanation for what she doing is that she is trying to win the public’s vote, not her NPs. And is therefore going for a People’s Vote.
She has apparently rejected a "peoples vote" 27 times in her Commons sojourns of the last week.
When the times change you change with them. If the Commons has rejected her deal something needs to happen instead, and if she is still PM she would have to consider the previously inconsiderable.
Indeed so but that might well be Norway plus rather than the remainiacs wet dream option
It might - it's one reason continuity remainers( including at least some pretending they want a new deal) are taking a bigger risk than they will admit.
Sky reporting more letters going in so vnoc on the cards. I am content for that to happen now.
It would help to resolve TM position in the party one way or another
What a peculiar time to send in letters.
The only explanation I can think of for why now, and not a week or so ago, or after the deal fails, is that a number of people are desperate to avoid voting on May's deal for some reason, since if she goes there is no point in bringing it to the House.
I don't understand that at all. If the deal is to be rejected for one the EU should be given the courtesy of the sovereign parliament rejecting it, not just the Tory party refusing to let parliament consider it, and for two given how many people are so confident this deal is such a pile of horsecrap, they should all welcome the opportunity to put their names to that belief.
Perhaps May, or if not herself, the men in grey suits, has asked loyalists to send in letters to force a vote so she can win it and not have to worry about it for another year.
TM has been selling this deal like Blair, but without his talent. Unless she is going for a reluctant People’s Vote, she has been very badly advised.
I think she might be going for a reluctant peoples' vote, but even if she is not, how do you think she should have been selling the deal? She certainly lacks the talent that Blair had in selling things, but what could she have done differently to sell it, given her limited talent? Serious question, as she could have approached things differently, but I'm uncertain which would have worked better.
First, she needs to decide who’s votes she is trying to win , Labour votes or Brexit Tories. You cannot win them all. So get off the fence. She should have forced the Tory VONC last week on her terms, win and then essentially ignored the ERG and persuade Labour votes.
My only current explanation for what she doing is that she is trying to win the public’s vote, not her NPs. And is therefore going for a People’s Vote.
She has apparently rejected a "peoples vote" 27 times in her Commons sojourns of the last week.
Dead cert then if 2017 is something to go by.
I don’t think she is that clever, but am prepared to be pleasantly surprised.
I think she would rather win the MPs vote, but she knows that is not going to happen so has always had one eye on what might come after.
She has spent her time not talking to MPs. She has been talking to voters as if it were an election campaign. Just saying.
A snap something is very likely.
Order of likelyhood
New PM
*large gap*
GE
* large gap*
meteorite strike
*large gap*
a "peepils vote"
So why is she running an election-like campaign? Is she simply a fool? I am not ruling that out, but I would hope not.
Interesting question by Wera Hobhouse; if after 2020 a person travels from Berlin to Dublin, Dublin to Belfast and then to London were is the immigration border?
Nowhere. The focus has all been on the NI border in terms of trade. There is no control of immigration without a hard border somewhere. If it isn't on the border, it has to be in the Irish Sea. Otherwise there is an end to FOM in law, but not in fact. Edit. Not sure how the border is at Dublin as @Carlotta suggests. Outsourcing our borders to a foreign state is a rather unique take on Taking Control?
Yes, you could get into the UK like that.
But then again, you could just fly from Berlin to the UK on a tourist visa and not go home when you said you would. (Which is, of course, how most Mexicans end up working in the US.)
Sky reporting more letters going in so vnoc on the cards. I am content for that to happen now.
It would help to resolve TM position in the party one way or another
What a peculiar time to send in letters.
The only explanation I can think of for why now, and not a week or so ago, or after the deal fails, is that a number of people are desperate to avoid voting on May's deal for some reason, since if she goes there is no point in bringing it to the House.
I don't understand that at all. If the deal is to be rejected for one the EU should be given the courtesy of the sovereign parliament rejecting it, not just the Tory party refusing to let parliament consider it, and for two given how many people are so confident this deal is such a pile of horsecrap, they should all welcome the opportunity to put their names to that belief.
Perhaps May, or if not herself, the men in grey suits, has asked loyalists to send in letters to force a vote so she can win it and not have to worry about it for another year.
I doubt she'd be safe even without a formal process to challenge her again (MPs could make her job impossible if they wanted) but like the ERG themselves if loyalists were going to do that they should have acted sooner.
Interesting question by Wera Hobhouse; if after 2020 a person travels from Berlin to Dublin, Dublin to Belfast and then to London were is the immigration border?
Dublin. The Irish check all passports - even UK ones.
However, it completely confuses FoM with "Immigration Control" - only the thickest would follow that route - everyone else will fly to Stansted as a "Tourist" and simply overstay.....
TM has been selling this deal like Blair, but without his talent. Unless she is going for a reluctant People’s Vote, she has been very badly advised.
I think she might be going for a reluctant peoples' vote, but even if she is not, how do you think she should have been selling the deal? She certainly lacks the talent that Blair had in selling things, but what could she have done differently to sell it, given her limited talent? Serious question, as she could have approached things differently, but I'm uncertain which would have worked better.
First, she needs to decide who’s votes she is trying to win , Labour votes or Brexit Tories. You cannot win them all. So get off the fence. She should have forced the Tory VONC last week on her terms, win and then essentially ignored the ERG and persuade Labour votes.
My only current explanation for what she doing is that she is trying to win the public’s vote, not her NPs. And is therefore going for a People’s Vote.
She has apparently rejected a "peoples vote" 27 times in her Commons sojourns of the last week.
When the times change you change with them. If the Commons has rejected her deal something needs to happen instead, and if she is still PM she would have to consider the previously inconsiderable.
Indeed so but that might well be Norway plus rather than the remainiacs wet dream option
Norway plus would do. Rejoining from there would be relatively easy, if opinion changes. And given the Brexiters' lack of plan or prowess so far, we could be in such an arrangement for a very long time, while they all argue about where to go next.
Interesting question by Wera Hobhouse; if after 2020 a person travels from Berlin to Dublin, Dublin to Belfast and then to London were is the immigration border?
There is no control of immigration without a hard border somewhere.
You are confusing FoM (the right to take up employment and access services and benefits) with "Immigration Control" - and even if you demanded visas from all visitors - it wouldn't stop people overstaying their visas.
No. I agree. Most will, as you say, fly in to the Mainland and overstay. However, if you fly to Dublin, as an EU citizen, catch a bus, or a train, to Belfast, then a ferry to Stranraer. Where is your passport checked?
In reality, certainly when I have come back from NI or ROI to GB, there are usually plain clothes blokes standing around just observing in a “not passport checking really, just looking hard” sort of a way. It’s unofficial because otherwise Arlene et al would go loopy but the ability to control who passes through the sausage machine of a very limited number of ports has always been too great.
I’m sure if we suddenly had a surge of “Iranian migrants” catching the ferry from Larne to Stranraer it would be picked up on pdq.
Thanks for the comments. Mrs May's answer was that the Common Travel Area would apply - which I assume means no formal checks. But what about passport checks or 'just looking.'
Getting 90 or so MPs to change their mind on Europe is .....nah, just forget it. Not going to happen.
May is toast. Before Christmas.
And then what and more important who can replace her and get consensus
I don't know. But getting the letters in now at least clears the air and if she loses, her succssor (and the new Chancellor) will have two extra weeks to prepare for No Deal, rather than waiting or the vote and then acting.
Failure to prepare for the contingency of a No Deal Brexit from July 2016 is the most egregious failure of government I can ever remember.
TM has been selling this deal like Blair, but without his talent. Unless she is going for a reluctant People’s Vote, she has been very badly advised.
I think she might be going for a reluctant peoples' vote, but even if she is not, how do you think she should have been selling the deal? She certainly lacks the talent that Blair had in selling things, but what could she have done differently to sell it, given her limited talent? Serious question, as she could have approached things differently, but I'm uncertain which would have worked better.
First, she needs to decide who’s votes she is trying to win , Labour votes or Brexit Tories. You cannot win them all. So get off the fence. She should have forced the Tory VONC last week on her terms, win and then essentially ignored the ERG and persuade Labour votes.
My only current explanation for what she doing is that she is trying to win the public’s vote, not her NPs. And is therefore going for a People’s Vote.
She has apparently rejected a "peoples vote" 27 times in her Commons sojourns of the last week.
When the times change you change with them. If the Commons has rejected her deal something needs to happen instead, and if she is still PM she would have to consider the previously inconsiderable.
Indeed so but that might well be Norway plus rather than the remainiacs wet dream option
Norway plus would do. Rejoining from there would be relatively easy, if opinion changes. And given the Brexiters' lack of plan or prowess so far, we could be in such an arrangement for a very long time, while they all argue about where to go next.
So far as I'm aware, queue jumping in normal life isn't illegal either, it just tends to make those being 'jumped', who were part of the queue (if judged in chronological order), annoyed. So legality is surely beside the point.
But there is literally no queue for EU migrants at present.
What rubbish, how can you queue jump when you are following the legal process. They take their rightful place based on the laws implemented by the Tories.
Why does queue jumping have to imply illegality?
Queue jumping is definitely in the "not right" section of the British mind.
I think the PM was right to apologise, and I'll leave this point now in case I turn into the ghost of @Scott_P.
There are plenty of queues in terms of immigration. EU citizens are exempt from all of them. Why should they be?
Er, because the arrangement is reciprocal?
We voted in 2016 to give up our FOM rights. No one in the country expected or expects that FOM would be ended only in one direction.
This is two separate issues. Freedom of Movement has nothing to do with passport control. Freedom of movement is the ability to settle in a country and work and the like. Passport control is about whether there is a requirement to fill in a "entry/exit" card.
If we want, post exit, we can leave the EU/EEA/Switzerland passport co-operation system, where there is a shared database of passport numbers, RFID, and elecrtonic photos. In which case, we'd move to a system like with the rest of the world where we have "entry/exit" cards, and EU/EEA/Switzerland citizens cannot use electronic passport gates. The effect of this would be to slightly reduce the amount of time British people took to get through passport control, and to substantially increase the time it takes EU/EEA/Swiss citizens.
Personally, I think it would be a mistake for us not to have a reciprocal agreement for passport control. It would inconvenience British travellers going abroad, and it would be a small - but meaningful - barrier to the UK remaining the business capital of Europe.
I think the Home Office has already stated that post-Brexit they expect that EU/EEA/Swiss travellers will continue to be able to use the eGates and the UK/Ireland desks. They are also proposing to open the eGates to other countries including the US. I'm sure that the trend will be more in that direction until only countries whose citizens require visas will need to see an immigration officer in person.
Getting 90 or so MPs to change their mind on Europe is .....nah, just forget it. Not going to happen.
May is toast. Before Christmas.
And then what and more important who can replace her and get consensus
I don't know. But getting the letters in now at least clears the air and if she loses, her succssor (and the new Chancellor) will have two extra weeks to prepare for No Deal, rather than waiting or the vote and then acting.
Failure to prepare for the contingency of a No Deal Brexit from July 2016 is the most egregious failure of government I can ever remember.
They promised big business right back at the beginning that it wasn't going to happen, so they could hardly then go about preparing for it, could they?
Getting 90 or so MPs to change their mind on Europe is .....nah, just forget it. Not going to happen.
May is toast. Before Christmas.
And then what and more important who can replace her and get consensus
I don't know. But getting the letters in now at least clears the air and if she loses, her succssor (and the new Chancellor) will have two extra weeks to prepare for No Deal, rather than waiting or the vote and then acting.
Failure to prepare for the contingency of a No Deal Brexit from July 2016 is the most egregious failure of government I can ever remember.
And how do you cope with an election for leader - remember my wife and I will not accept a coronation unless it was a unity candidate
I have not seen the debate but looks like she has said Norway is not recognising the vote.
I think that is unwise as I do believe, as I said this morning, that would pass the HOC and avoid the need for a dreadfully divisive, angry and full of hate referendum. Those wanting one need to be careful for what they wish for. It does not even guarantee a different result
Norway does not end FoM.
Do you think allowing continued FoM recognises the vote?
She's picked up the Blair play sheet. Go and sell it over the heads of the politicians and sound reasonable and lawyerly. On paper a maniacal attack on Iraq being lead by George W Bush sounds a more difficult sell but Blair had the Tories and their newspapers on side
If it wasn't that she's told so many porkies you could admire her tenacity and good humour.
May has been remarkably good at maintaining the mandate of the referendum. She will finally put an end to two decades of mass migration.
Most of which was from outside the EU...
As for free movement, when will it end? You can’t say because this deal doesn’t tell us what the future relationship will be.
Non-EU migration is now virtually entirely highly skilled. That is not the case with the cockle pickers and beggars from Romania and Bulgaria.
Free movement will end at the end of the implementation period.
The way you slip into unpleasantly blaming immigrants for all your own policy failures is straight out of May's very tarnished copybook.
There's no need for that kind of unpleasant racist abuse here.
I went into Pret this morning and the Romanian beggars were having their morning scam meeting, I think they were running late because I usually see them dotted on corners in the City by then. I think you're kidding yourself if you really believe that we haven't imported tens of thousands of professional pan handlers from Romania over the last few years. I used to see a similar group operating in Soho when I was consulting there for a few months.
She's picked up the Blair play sheet. Go and sell it over the heads of the politicians and sound reasonable and lawyerly. On paper a maniacal attack on Iraq being lead by George W Bush sounds more difficult sell but Blair had the Tories and their newspapers on side
If it wasn't that she's told so many porkies you could admire her tenacity and good humour.
Blair did that (the masochism strategy) as elections approached.
An issue not discussed by Mike is that Betfair include the phrases 'a government motion' and 'a EU withdrawal agreement'. Presumably if the government were to propose (after discussion and defeat on the first/second vote) an amended motion approving the agreement then the bet would win.
I have not seen the debate but looks like she has said Norway is not recognising the vote.
I think that is unwise as I do believe, as I said this morning, that would pass the HOC and avoid the need for a dreadfully divisive, angry and full of hate referendum. Those wanting one need to be careful for what they wish for. It does not even guarantee a different result
Norway does not end FoM.
Do you think allowing continued FoM recognises the vote?
Personally FOM does not worry me and we need a practical solution to this crisis
TM has been selling this deal like Blair, but without his talent. Unless she is going for a reluctant People’s Vote, she has been very badly advised.
I think she might be going for a reluctant peoples' vote, but even if she is not, how do you think she should have been selling the deal? She certainly lacks the talent that Blair had in selling things, but what could she have done differently to sell it, given her limited talent? Serious question, as she could have approached things differently, but I'm uncertain which would have worked better.
First, she needs to decide who’s votes she is trying to win , Labour votes or Brexit Tories. You cannot win them all. So get off the fence. She should have forced the Tory VONC last week on her terms, win and then essentially ignored the ERG and persuade Labour votes.
My only current explanation for what she doing is that she is trying to win the public’s vote, not her NPs. And is therefore going for a People’s Vote.
She has apparently rejected a "peoples vote" 27 times in her Commons sojourns of the last week.
Dead cert then if 2017 is something to go by.
I don’t think she is that clever, but am prepared to be pleasantly surprised.
I think she would rather win the MPs vote, but she knows that is not going to happen so has always had one eye on what might come after.
She has spent her time not talking to MPs. She has been talking to voters as if it were an election campaign. Just saying.
A snap something is very likely.
Order of likelyhood
New PM
*large gap*
GE
* large gap*
meteorite strike
*large gap*
a "peepils vote"
Given an estimated 18-84,000 meteorite strikes happen on earth each year, the 2nd Referendum looks very likely on your scale!
I have not seen the debate but looks like she has said Norway is not recognising the vote.
I think that is unwise as I do believe, as I said this morning, that would pass the HOC and avoid the need for a dreadfully divisive, angry and full of hate referendum. Those wanting one need to be careful for what they wish for. It does not even guarantee a different result
Norway does not end FoM.
Do you think allowing continued FoM recognises the vote?
May would argue that she tried to deal with this but Parliament rejected it. So who is the question actually aimed at? The reason so many are predicting an A50 extension and another vote is that there is no option that commands a majority in Parliament. If a late Norway proposal managed to secure such, as a transitional agreement pending someone coming up with a credible plan, any quibbling over the detail would easily be batted away.
Getting 90 or so MPs to change their mind on Europe is .....nah, just forget it. Not going to happen.
May is toast. Before Christmas.
And then what and more important who can replace her and get consensus
I don't know. But getting the letters in now at least clears the air and if she loses, her succssor (and the new Chancellor) will have two extra weeks to prepare for No Deal, rather than waiting or the vote and then acting.
Failure to prepare for the contingency of a No Deal Brexit from July 2016 is the most egregious failure of government I can ever remember.
And how do you cope with an election for leader - remember my wife and I will not accept a coronation unless it was a unity candidate
With respect, though BigG. One of the features of a coronation is that, by definition, you don't get a say.
If the Commons rejects the Deal on the first vote I think May could pivot towards backing a permanent Customs Union for the UK given the Deal already includes a temporary Customs Union for the whole UK as the backstop and Corbyn backs a permanent Customs Union for the UK and May back the Deal in such circumstances
Evening Standard's leader strongly indicating that Gove has plans to throw May under a bus and the whole cabinet is going to pivot to EEA/EFTA in the aftermath of the botched deal being ceremonially disembowelled by Parliament.
I have not seen the debate but looks like she has said Norway is not recognising the vote.
I think that is unwise as I do believe, as I said this morning, that would pass the HOC and avoid the need for a dreadfully divisive, angry and full of hate referendum. Those wanting one need to be careful for what they wish for. It does not even guarantee a different result
Norway does not end FoM.
Do you think allowing continued FoM recognises the vote?
May would argue that she tried to deal with this but Parliament rejected it. So who is the question actually aimed at? The reason so many are predicting an A50 extension and another vote is that there is no option that commands a majority in Parliament. If a late Norway proposal managed to secure such, as a transitional agreement pending someone coming up with a credible plan, any quibbling over the detail would easily be batted away.
Labour is opposed to the Norway option as EFTA countries are not in the Customs Union as the Shadow Justice secretary confirmed yesterday and both May and Corbyn still oppose EUref2
I think the Home Office has already stated that post-Brexit they expect that EU/EEA/Swiss travellers will continue to be able to use the eGates and the UK/Ireland desks. They are also proposing to open the eGates to other countries including the US. I'm sure that the trend will be more in that direction until only countries whose citizens require visas will need to see an immigration officer in person.
Which is an eminently sensible direction to be heading in.
Getting 90 or so MPs to change their mind on Europe is .....nah, just forget it. Not going to happen.
May is toast. Before Christmas.
And then what and more important who can replace her and get consensus
I don't know. But getting the letters in now at least clears the air and if she loses, her succssor (and the new Chancellor) will have two extra weeks to prepare for No Deal, rather than waiting or the vote and then acting.
Failure to prepare for the contingency of a No Deal Brexit from July 2016 is the most egregious failure of government I can ever remember.
And how do you cope with an election for leader - remember my wife and I will not accept a coronation unless it was a unity candidate
It's going to be a coronation. Possibly Hunt, as he has probably pissed off the least number of senior players. Not Gove, not Boris. Equally not Rudd, not Greening. Although as we ideally need somebody who is fully au fait with the minutiae of Brexit, I would be happy to see Geoffrey Cox for a (self-limited) term of a couple of years as a sane voice to get the country sorted out. Then hold a proper election for members in the normal time-frame, for all the runners and riders ahead of an election.
Any new leader will have to at least have another run around for a deal with Brussels, unfettered by May and Robbin's commitments. Brussels might not blink - but they might squint a bit. I still think, privately Brussels will be appalled if we No Deal Brexit. And we aren't yet 48 hours from end date, when EU deals finally reach a grounding.
Evening Standard's leader strongly indicating that Gove has plans to throw May under a bus and the whole cabinet is going to pivot to EEA/EFTA in the aftermath of the botched deal being ceremonially disembowelled by Parliament.
Does it suggest they'll be looking for a unity candidate to come back to the HoC and lead them? ("Oh, hello George, are you busy." "Nope, only got a dozen jobs at the mo.")
The thing is, the No caucus now has critical mass. If there only a few Noes, the whips could peel them off. But the Tory no vote now outstrips the non-payroll vote that could possibly back it. They now have the mass to counter-bully waverers into No away from the whips' bullying.
If you're a Tory backbencher you'd have to think *very* carefully about backing this, as it could seriously damage your future prospects.
There is no doubt the slippery Macron did May no favours with his fisheries comments. Probably hardened up opinion in the HoC this afternoon.
It was so stupid I can only presume it was deliberate
He was gloating because he thinks the UK have maneuvered ourselves into a lose-lose situation from which no escape is possible, and he can't help himself because he has narcissistic personality disorder.
Evening Standard's leader strongly indicating that Gove has plans to throw May under a bus and the whole cabinet is going to pivot to EEA/EFTA in the aftermath of the botched deal being ceremonially disembowelled by Parliament.
Getting 90 or so MPs to change their mind on Europe is .....nah, just forget it. Not going to happen.
May is toast. Before Christmas.
And then what and more important who can replace her and get consensus
I don't know. But getting the letters in now at least clears the air and if she loses, her succssor (and the new Chancellor) will have two extra weeks to prepare for No Deal, rather than waiting or the vote and then acting.
Failure to prepare for the contingency of a No Deal Brexit from July 2016 is the most egregious failure of government I can ever remember.
And how do you cope with an election for leader - remember my wife and I will not accept a coronation unless it was a unity candidate
With respect, though BigG. One of the features of a coronation is that, by definition, you don't get a say.
Evening Standard's leader strongly indicating that Gove has plans to throw May under a bus and the whole cabinet is going to pivot to EEA/EFTA in the aftermath of the botched deal being ceremonially disembowelled by Parliament.
Given that Gove campaigned to leave the single market, that would take his shamelessness to new levels.
If the Commons rejects the Deal on the first vote I think May could pivot towards backing a permanent Customs Union for the UK given the Deal already includes a temporary Customs Union for the whole UK as the backstop and Corbyn backs a permanent Customs Union for the UK and May back the Deal in such circumstances
And when the EU says "OK, with continued FoM" then what?
Evening Standard's leader strongly indicating that Gove has plans to throw May under a bus and the whole cabinet is going to pivot to EEA/EFTA in the aftermath of the botched deal being ceremonially disembowelled by Parliament.
Evening Standard's leader strongly indicating that Gove has plans to throw May under a bus and the whole cabinet is going to pivot to EEA/EFTA in the aftermath of the botched deal being ceremonially disembowelled by Parliament.
Continued FoM will cost them......
Nah, everyone will be so delighted we've found our way out of our insane self-made trap. The media and the EU and civil society will be trumpeting our narrow escape from disaster from every rooftop.
The people that rescued us from May's insane botched brexit will be lauded as national heroes. Even the Mail and the Express and the Sun will breathe a sigh of relief.
Sure, a few gammons might die from literally just exploding from all their built-up racist bile, but ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Getting 90 or so MPs to change their mind on Europe is .....nah, just forget it. Not going to happen.
May is toast. Before Christmas.
And then what and more important who can replace her and get consensus
I don't know. But getting the letters in now at least clears the air and if she loses, her succssor (and the new Chancellor) will have two extra weeks to prepare for No Deal, rather than waiting or the vote and then acting.
Failure to prepare for the contingency of a No Deal Brexit from July 2016 is the most egregious failure of government I can ever remember.
And how do you cope with an election for leader - remember my wife and I will not accept a coronation unless it was a unity candidate
It's going to be a coronation. Possibly Hunt, as he has probably pissed off the least number of senior players. Not Gove, not Boris. Equally not Rudd, not Greening. Although as we ideally need somebody who is fully au fait with the minutiae of Brexit, I would be happy to see Geoffrey Cox for a (self-limited) term of a couple of years as a sane voice to get the country sorted out. Then hold a proper election for members in the normal time-frame, for all the runners and riders ahead of an election.
Any new leader will have to at least have another run around for a deal with Brussels, unfettered by May and Robbin's commitments. Brussels might not blink - but they might squint a bit. I still think, privately Brussels will be appalled if we No Deal Brexit. And we aren't yet 48 hours from end date, when EU deals finally reach a grounding.
And how is it going to be a coronation. Are you a voting member by the way
I have not seen the debate but looks like she has said Norway is not recognising the vote.
I think that is unwise as I do believe, as I said this morning, that would pass the HOC and avoid the need for a dreadfully divisive, angry and full of hate referendum. Those wanting one need to be careful for what they wish for. It does not even guarantee a different result
Norway does not end FoM.
Do you think allowing continued FoM recognises the vote?
Yes. Couch it with the capacity to put emergency brakes in immigrations and an intention to start enforcing the powers that we have but don’t use to to keep the chancers out.
Getting 90 or so MPs to change their mind on Europe is .....nah, just forget it. Not going to happen.
May is toast. Before Christmas.
And then what and more important who can replace her and get consensus
I don't know. But getting the letters in now at least clears the air and if she loses, her succssor (and the new emember.
And how do you cope with an election for leader - remember my wife and I will not accept a coronation unless it was a unity candidate
It's going to be a coronation. Possibly Hunt, as he has probably pissed off the least number of senior players. Not Gove, not Boris. Equally not Rudd, not Greening. Although as we ideally need somebody who is fully au fait with the minutiae of Brexit, I would be happy to see Geoffrey Cox for a (self-limited) term of a couple of years as a sane voice to get the country sorted out. Then hold a proper election for members in the normal time-frame, for all the runners and riders ahead of an election.
Any new leader will have to at least have another run around for a deal with Brussels, unfettered by May and Robbin's commitments. Brussels might not blink - but they might squint a bit. I still think, privately Brussels will be appalled if we No Deal Brexit. And we aren't yet 48 hours from end date, when EU deals finally reach a grounding.
A coronation for what. If May goes the members will vote for Boris by a landslide as all the Tory members' polls show and given Hunt has tied his mast to May's Deal and Juncker last night flatly said 'it is this Deal or No Deal' Hunt will have no alternative but to be the candidate of the Deal effectively and the ERG and Brexiteers will force a contest basically and we go to No Deal under PM Boris propped up by the DUP who he wowed last weekend. Unless Grieve and Soubry etc force a VONC which is possible.
Talking about new leaders and Tory PMs now is pathetic and fiddling while Rome burns given the economic damage No Deal Brexit would do. Either stick with May and back either this Deal or permanent Customs Union or get Corbyn to become PM and do permanent Customs Union so at least we get a Deal and go into opposition under Boris as leader where Tories can rally around a pure Brexit agenda
I object to the use of the word 'crack'. Events have shown that May could fall into a rosebed and come out smelling of shit. She couldn't pick a decent five-a-side team.
What a load of nonsense, EU people do queue jump, perfectly legally, but they do that. Why are we so scared of speaking the truth.
Er. Cos if it is perfectly legal it isn't queue jumping? It is following the lawful process.
So far as I'm aware, queue jumping in normal life isn't illegal either, it just tends to make those being 'jumped', who were part of the queue (if judged in chronological order), annoyed. So legality is surely beside the point.
But there is literally no queue for EU migrants at present.
What rubbish, how can you queue jump when you are following the legal process. They take their rightful place based on the laws implemented by the Tories.
Why does queue jumping have to imply illegality?
Queue jumping is definitely in the "not right" section of the British mind.
I think the PM was right to apologise, and I'll leave this point now in case I turn into the ghost of @Scott_P.
There are plenty of queues in terms of immigration. EU citizens are exempt from all of them. Why should they be?
Belatedly, because it’s reciprocal? When I go to Frankfurt, I can be at Willi Brandt Platz within an hour of landing. When I go to the US, I play a game of guess the time from landing to being on my way (note, not downtown). Last week at Dulles, 30 minutes. Earlier this year, 3 hours. Equally, Mexico City, 2.5 hours, Domodedovo, lose will. That’s why they’re exempt and I’d be happy for US tourists to suffer that I have to.
There is no doubt the slippery Macron did May no favours with his fisheries comments. Probably hardened up opinion in the HoC this afternoon.
Of course permanent Customs Union reduces the need to resolve the future trading relationship and concede to Macron on fisheries
Dumb question, sorry, we can be in a permanent CU but out of the CFP and CAP yes?
That is Norway, as I understand it.
Norway is not in the Customs Union, but is a member of the European Economic Area. They therefore have their own trade deals, but agree to implement all product (and services) standards for goods sold domestically as for the the rest of the EU. They are also a member of the Single Market for Labour.
Being a member of the EEA, like Norway, would mean:
- no CAP, no CFP - no EU law outside standards - single passport for financial services - substantially reduced payments - continued FoM
If it wasn't for the FoM, I think it would be a no brainer.
Edit to add: the EEA treaty also allows you to quit giving 12 months notice
Evening Standard's leader strongly indicating that Gove has plans to throw May under a bus and the whole cabinet is going to pivot to EEA/EFTA in the aftermath of the botched deal being ceremonially disembowelled by Parliament.
Continued FoM will cost them......
Nah, everyone will be so delighted
It will poison British politics for decades.
We will see Far Right UKIP types rise.
Its really not worth 3.9% off the GDP by 2030 (as if we'll ever know).
Getting 90 or so MPs to change their mind on Europe is .....nah, just forget it. Not going to happen.
May is toast. Before Christmas.
And then what and more important who can replace her and get consensus
I don't know. But getting the letters in now at least clears the air and if she loses, her succssor (and the new Chancellor) will have two extra weeks to prepare for No Deal, rather than waiting or the vote and then acting.
Failure to prepare for the contingency of a No Deal Brexit from July 2016 is the most egregious failure of government I can ever remember.
And how do you cope with an election for leader - remember my wife and I will not accept a coronation unless it was a unity candidate
It's going to be a coronation. Possibly Hunt, as he has probably pissed off the least number of senior players. Not Gove, not Boris. Equally not Rudd, not Greening. Although as we ideally need somebody who is fully au fait with the minutiae of Brexit, I would be happy to see Geoffrey Cox for a (self-limited) term of a couple of years as a sane voice to get the country sorted out. Then hold a proper election for members in the normal time-frame, for all the runners and riders ahead of an election.
Any new leader will have to at least have another run around for a deal with Brussels, unfettered by May and Robbin's commitments. Brussels might not blink - but they might squint a bit. I still think, privately Brussels will be appalled if we No Deal Brexit. And we aren't yet 48 hours from end date, when EU deals finally reach a grounding.
The EU as Juncker made clear are not that bothered, as he said 'it is this Deal or No Deal' No Deal as far as Brussels is concerned screws us more than them and is a lesson pour encourager les autres and any other nations thinking of leaving the EU. The only way the EU may reconsinder is if the UK make further concessions ef permanent Customs Union or permanent Single Market or ideally if the UK reverses Brexit altogether in EUtef2. The EU certainly ain't making any concessions to the UK on the backstop or anything else
Evening Standard's leader strongly indicating that Gove has plans to throw May under a bus and the whole cabinet is going to pivot to EEA/EFTA in the aftermath of the botched deal being ceremonially disembowelled by Parliament.
Continued FoM will cost them......
Nah, everyone will be so delighted
It will poison British politics for decades.
We will see Far Right UKIP types rise.
Oh I'm sure everyone will be so sad that that racist gammon vote will no longer be driving mainstream political debate and the Conservative Party will once again be forced to couch its innate racism in more measured terms.
There is no doubt the slippery Macron did May no favours with his fisheries comments. Probably hardened up opinion in the HoC this afternoon.
Of course permanent Customs Union reduces the need to resolve the future trading relationship and concede to Macron on fisheries
Dumb question, sorry, we can be in a permanent CU but out of the CFP and CAP yes?
That is Norway, as I understand it.
I don’t believe Norway in the CU.
Yes sorry, was thinking single market.
No matter what the blithering, no matter the seemingly inability to resolve the Irish border. Every block in the path will wash away under a Norway option. It’s infinitely better than what’s proposed. It resolves the WA and the future trading agreement. A member of EFTA and the associated EEA makes us well within the orbit of the EU and gives us the freeedom to make trade agreements while still in the single market. It’s such an obvious sodding win win both parliament and the Eu will grab the gvts arms off to get it.
It al so means Brexit is put to bed. Done, finished with. Goal achieved. Let’s move the f*** on to more important things like the AV thread.
Evening Standard's leader strongly indicating that Gove has plans to throw May under a bus and the whole cabinet is going to pivot to EEA/EFTA in the aftermath of the botched deal being ceremonially disembowelled by Parliament.
Continued FoM will cost them......
Nah, everyone will be so delighted
It will poison British politics for decades.
We will see Far Right UKIP types rise.
Its really not worth 3.9% off the GDP by 2030 (as if we'll ever know).
FPTP politics mean that they won’t really rise. Unless you’re suggesting that the ERG types would find brown shirts more appealing.
More important than the number is that the people opposed are, by and large, saying it is for pretty fundamental reasons. That blows away the wishful thinking that these people will change their tune on a second vote, if there even is one.
We need to stop kidding ourselves. Even market chaos is not going to change these minds, since they are very clear just how bad they think the agreement is.
Comments
I don’t think she is that clever, but am prepared to be pleasantly surprised.
It would help to resolve TM position in the party one way or another
Corbyn might as well be given his chance than have the Tories waste months on a new leader contest (if they could unite around a leader and a brexit position they would not have taken this long to challenge May) and then still be very divided at the end of it.
Corbyn would very probably not be up to resolving the current challenges. But at this point he might well do a better job than the Tories.
The Timothy/Hill era does seem to have been a reversal of the old saying that "advisers advise, ministers decide".
Can't fatten a pig on market day.
At weekend it was reported that letters were being pulled!
A snap something is very likely.
The only explanation I can think of for why now, and not a week or so ago, or after the deal fails, is that a number of people are desperate to avoid voting on May's deal for some reason, since if she goes there is no point in bringing it to the House.
I don't understand that at all. If the deal is to be rejected for one the EU should be given the courtesy of the sovereign parliament rejecting it, not just the Tory party refusing to let parliament consider it, and for two given how many people are so confident this deal is such a pile of horsecrap, they should all welcome the opportunity to put their names to that belief.
New PM
*large gap*
GE
* large gap*
meteorite strike
*large gap*
a "peepils vote"
If we want, post exit, we can leave the EU/EEA/Switzerland passport co-operation system, where there is a shared database of passport numbers, RFID, and elecrtonic photos. In which case, we'd move to a system like with the rest of the world where we have "entry/exit" cards, and EU/EEA/Switzerland citizens cannot use electronic passport gates. The effect of this would be to slightly reduce the amount of time British people took to get through passport control, and to substantially increase the time it takes EU/EEA/Swiss citizens.
Personally, I think it would be a mistake for us not to have a reciprocal agreement for passport control. It would inconvenience British travellers going abroad, and it would be a small - but meaningful - barrier to the UK remaining the business capital of Europe.
I think that is unwise as I do believe, as I said this morning, that would pass the HOC and avoid the need for a dreadfully divisive, angry and full of hate referendum. Those wanting one need to be careful for what they wish for. It does not even guarantee a different result
But then again, you could just fly from Berlin to the UK on a tourist visa and not go home when you said you would. (Which is, of course, how most Mexicans end up working in the US.)
It is upto the UN and Nato
Failure to prepare for the contingency of a No Deal Brexit from July 2016 is the most egregious failure of government I can ever remember.
I wonder whats going on in the Pentagon?
No doubt Putin thought Thanksgiving weekend was a good time to kick the ball around a bit.
Do you think allowing continued FoM recognises the vote?
If it wasn't that she's told so many porkies you could admire her tenacity and good humour.
Lots of lefties will burn or otherwise despoil her image...thereby controlling the money supply...
And who is her replacement
But in honesty no
http://curious.astro.cornell.edu/about-us/75-our-solar-system/comets-meteors-and-asteroids/meteorites/313-how-many-meteorites-hit-earth-each-year-intermediate
In other news, good luck to the Mars Insight lander, when it attempts to land on Mars in an hour or so.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/ampstories/marslander/index.html
https://twitter.com/alexwickham/status/1067128395870466050
Any new leader will have to at least have another run around for a deal with Brussels, unfettered by May and Robbin's commitments. Brussels might not blink - but they might squint a bit. I still think, privately Brussels will be appalled if we No Deal Brexit. And we aren't yet 48 hours from end date, when EU deals finally reach a grounding.
It might all be fantasy, js.
If you're a Tory backbencher you'd have to think *very* carefully about backing this, as it could seriously damage your future prospects.
The people that rescued us from May's insane botched brexit will be lauded as national heroes. Even the Mail and the Express and the Sun will breathe a sigh of relief.
Sure, a few gammons might die from literally just exploding from all their built-up racist bile, but ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Yes. Couch it with the capacity to put emergency brakes in immigrations and an intention to start enforcing the powers that we have but don’t use to to keep the chancers out.
Talking about new leaders and Tory PMs now is pathetic and fiddling while Rome burns given the economic damage No Deal Brexit would do. Either stick with May and back either this Deal or permanent Customs Union or get Corbyn to become PM and do permanent Customs Union so at least we get a Deal and go into opposition under Boris as leader where Tories can rally around a pure Brexit agenda
Being a member of the EEA, like Norway, would mean:
- no CAP, no CFP
- no EU law outside standards
- single passport for financial services
- substantially reduced payments
- continued FoM
If it wasn't for the FoM, I think it would be a no brainer.
Edit to add: the EEA treaty also allows you to quit giving 12 months notice
https://twitter.com/alexwickham/status/1067131466855981056
May's people briefing that a No majority of "only" 100 will be claimed as a success.
We will see Far Right UKIP types rise.
Its really not worth 3.9% off the GDP by 2030 (as if we'll ever know).
So May is choosing to face a PMQs the day after.
It al so means Brexit is put to bed. Done, finished with. Goal achieved. Let’s move the f*** on to more important things like the AV thread.
Edit - the council meeting is the 13 and 14th
We need to stop kidding ourselves. Even market chaos is not going to change these minds, since they are very clear just how bad they think the agreement is.